The first of a two-part series, today we review a long and complicated list of things STM publishers are doing wrong. Tomorrow, we’ll explore the opposite question — what are STM publishers doing right?
The principal impediment to changing or developing an organization is the view of the management that they already are doing a good job. Thus all new initiatives are measured in terms of past successes.
The Kitchen continues to thrive — more than a million views in 2012, thousands of followers, and a lot of energy going into 2013. Here are some details.
Funders — corporate, governmental, and philanthropic — have different priorities, yet they are now reaching into scientific publishing, wearing OA as a glove that fits. This post explores the problems this is creating and might create if allowed to perpetuate.
In this first part of a three-part series, the intrusion of governments into scientific publishing is contemplated — its causes, current state, and possible effects.
While your sales reps are doing a great job overall, here are six mistakes that can creep into their interactions with buyers.
In order to take best advantage of new digital technology, a publisher must identify new places and ways that products can be sold. New media requires new markets or the investment in digital media will simply be an unwelcome additional expense.
What is the likely value of what PubMed Central is providing to eLife by publishing them free online, providing PubMed indexing without delay, and getting them into the market six months early?
When you think through all the effects stealing traffic has on online publishing businesses, PubMed Central’s competitive presence looms large — whether you sell subscriptions, ads, or APCs.
More articles are published by PubMed Central at the behest of eLife. It seems taxpayer-funded publishing is just fine for this new group.
As e-books have become mainstream, the art of using free e-books to drive print sales is coming to an end. But there are next steps for those who wish to think ahead.
A fundamental confusion between articles and data leads to a call for more CC licenses and less copyright. But why are data being closed down while articles are being opened up? Is there a fundamental misunderstanding of copyright, licensing, and rights?
Publishers have lost ground in the public debate of the role of publishing in scholarly communications. A new strategy is needed, one that emphasizes preemption, cooptation, and innovation.
Last week, PubMed Central became the primary and sole publisher of eLife content, putting its competition with publishers, its manipulation of PubMed indexing criteria, its competition with publishing technology companies, and its clear OA bias into stark relief.
“Author-service” journals sound like a straightforward proposition, but when you contemplate how authorship is a minority activity by a minority of practicing scientists and science practitioners, it becomes much less clear that author service is enough to support robust publishing practices.